DSmoke - Posted - 01/01/2021:  17:09:28

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wildeman

quote:

---

Originally posted by DSmoke

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wildeman

quote:

---

Originally posted by DSmoke

Fascinating beezaboy. I believe these pictures will more than justify why one would "assume" Lange made them. This is my Paramount B serial number 147 that I posted here about before and a Paramount Leader that I previously owned. This leads me to wonder what is the rim size on the Royal Artist and Tempo Grande? If I remember correctly the Tempo Grande is 11-1/2".

---

My Royal Artist has an 11" head and does not have the patented Houdlett tone ring supports though it still has the patent date on it. Otherwise it is identical to the one Beezaboy posted.

---

I noticed in your pictures that it looks like your tone ring is supported by wood, which looks beveled inward from the rim.  It could just be my perception of the photo.  It looked very unique to me and unlike other Bruno's I've seen online.  I would also like to confirm the 11" measurement.  Most Paramounts are 11-1/8" and are often mistakenly fitted with 11" heads.  However the Paramount rim is not 11", but the tone ring supports and metal band create that head diameter.  So if there was a change in that design it is very conceivable that it could be 11"  

---

Yes, the tone ring sits on a wood ledge, there are also some other supports in line with the hooks that are hard to see through the head.

---

Looks like 11" which just further adds to the mystery.  I'm not a historian or researcher but simply observe these differences.  I'm a big Lange fan and have always admired the 2 Bruno banjos mentioned in this post as I believed they were Lange made.  Peter, John, and others will hopefully figure this out in due time.  Thanks for the post and hopefully this thread keeps going here.

tdennis - Posted - 01/01/2021:  17:29:08

gbase.com/gear/orpheum-bruno-t...no-2-1920

Here is a second Tempo Grand no2. on GBASE. (so the spelling on my Tempo Grand no2 is not a one-off mistake). (BTW I'm a bit surprised by the high $$ these instruments, both 1 & 2's, command in looking at some recent sales online)